Could Hopkins Attain ATG Top 10 p4p Status?

[McGrain]

In the next two years? What do you think?

Say he beats Calzaghe/Kessler, pretty convincingly, then climbs up to heavyweight and grabs a strap, then retires.

He'd have 20 defences at Middle, champ at 168, ring champ at 175 plus strap holder at heavy.

Could he scale top 10 heights? How about top 20?

[TBooze]

In the next two years? What do you think?

Say he beats Calzaghe/Kessler, pretty convincingly, then climbs up to heavyweight and grabs a strap, then retires.

He'd have 20 defences at Middle, champ at 168, ring champ at 175 plus strap holder at heavy.

Could he scale top 10 heights? How about top 20?

No, he needs to crack the top 35 first...

He may one day be great, but that is 20 years or so away IMO.

[McGrain]

No, he needs to crack the top 35 first...

So what does he have to do to break the top 35?

[Jose FM]

In the next two years? What do you think?

Say he beats Calzaghe/Kessler, pretty convincingly, then climbs up to heavyweight and grabs a strap, then retires.

He'd have 20 defences at Middle, champ at 168, ring champ at 175 plus strap holder at heavy.

Could he scale top 10 heights? How about top 20?
Thats assuming alot! Hes in great shape for 42, anyday now and rightly so he body can get old over night.

[Jose FM]

But to answer your question no.

[McGrain]

Thats assuming alot! Hes in great shape for 42, anyday now and rightly so he body can get old over night.

Of coures; but we're talking about the top ten here. I'm interested in the highest possible position he could realisticaly attain.

[TBooze]

So what does he have to do to break the top 35?

Wait, and hope Taylor turns out to have a mighty fine career...

[McGrain]

Wait, and hope Taylor turns out to have a mighty fine career...


:lol:

Not an unreasonable point of view.

IN HIS DEFENCE. He'd have won both over 15 IMO.

Tell me what you would do with him if he beat Clazaghe/Kessler and Chagaev.

[TBooze]

:lol:

Not an unreasonable point of view.

IN HIS DEFENCE. He'd have won both over 15 IMO.

Tell me what you would do with him if he beat Clazaghe/Kessler and Chagaev.

I think if he did that, he would finish off in the top 25 of all-time...

[Jose FM]

Of coures; but we're talking about the top ten here. I'm interested in the highest possible position he could realisticaly attain.
Well, if he does pick up the undisputed 168lb belt and moves up to pick up a HW, which will probably be impossible if Klits fights Ibragimov/ Ruslan winner, and then Peter would have the other belt, and i dont see Hopkins beating either. Then top 20-15 ATG.

[Street Lethal]

Hopkins unified the title in September 2001 and posted 7 successful title defenses. Stop inflating his accomplishments.

[rekcutnevets]

If Hopkins did the 168 thing, and then the heavyweight thing, you could argue top 10 with ease.

I don't have making it now.

[Street Lethal]

Correction: 6 successful title defense.

[Sizzle]

You could already argue top10 P4P.

His dominance of the middleweight division is similar to Joe Louis' of the heavyweight division, not to mention jumping up two weight classes and beating the recognized lightheavyweight champion at the age of 42, then defending against a 7 years younger current top10 pound for pounder in Winky Wright.

His resume into his old age is absolutely extraodinary - Very few fighters have accomplished the sort of dominance past their physical prime as Hopkins has, and this is due to his incredible adaptation and fundamental boxing ability. The man, biologically, has been on the physical decline for the past 12 years.

His fighting style may not be pretty anymore but he's still getting the job done - I know Roberto Duran is quick to single out Hopkins specifically for tremendous praise in interviews.

I think the film of him in fights such as the Glen Johnson one (A man with some credible victories on his resume) shows that he is capable of mixing it with any middleweight of any era. He was an incredible fighter.

[My dinner with Conteh]

IN HIS DEFENCE. He'd have won both over 15 IMO.



What kind of defence is that? :huh

[Amsterdam]

A win over Calzaghe at this point, after Calzaghe thrashes Kessler makes him an arguable top 5, much less top 10.

[Amsterdam]

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

What's funny?

Do you realise that Calzaghe would be a universal best ever at 168, as well as the undisputed Champion?

For Hopkins to defeat the best, who would still be very fresh, as well as pick up the undisputed 168 champ after defeating Tarver for the lineal 175 and Winky(moving up in weight) a top 3 consensus P4P level fighter, you're going to have a tough damn time arguing he's not a top 10 P4P fighter.

Calzaghe's a fucking physical phenominon, holds a tremendous styles advantage, I feel that Hopkins would lose nearly every round, so for him to conquer that and beat Calzaghe by some specific game plan, for me that would put him in the top 5, especially considering what his record would be if the modern era had 15 round fights where he'd have possibly defeated Jones and would have definitley KOed Taylor late twice...

But go on and tell me why some primitive era guy like Greb would be superior to a Hopkins retirement on a win over an undefeated Joe Calzaghe.

[TBooze]

Do you realise that Calzaghe would be a universal best ever at 168, as well as the undisputed Champion?


Chong Pal Park competes for the best with Calzaghe at 168lbs (1983 onwards), although Calzaghe probably has taken the #1 spot now.

Calzaghe never has been undisupted champion. From the late 80s onwards that is virtually impossible to achieve.

[MrSmall]

Chagaev is a talented fighter, why does everyone think anyone moving up can beat him?
I thought Maskaev was the likely candidate for that.

[fists of fury]

No.
If he manages to win a title at heavyweight then all it show is how pathetic that division really is. Frankly, it shows how bad the light heavyweight division is that a 42 year old man can be the champ.

Hopkins was a great middleweight champion, but leat's not get carried away...the Winky fight was a clutch fest, not a boxing match.

[McGrain]

What kind of defence is that? :huh

The best I could come up with at short notice.

I often think abou that kind of thing (Hagler-Leonard, the Lewis KO v McCall) and how it might have panned out in a different era. I'm not suggesting it's proof of anything other than Hopkins was far from outclassed.

[sweet_scientist]

To me the issue with rating him so high is that he was never THAT THAT THAT great in his prime. Sure he has aged nicely, and continues to fight at an elite level, but at his absolute best, there were still many, many fighters better than him.

So what I'm saying is, in terms of longevity and resume sure he'd be up there, but in terms of ability and head to head comparisons, he'll never be near the very top becuase his very best is not as good as quite a few other fighters.

Right now, I dont think I'd have him top 40, but a few more good wins and he could move into the 30's.

I'll always find it hard to place him above Roy Jones though, who himself is in the 30's for me.

[JohnThomas1]

To me the issue with rating him so high is that he was never THAT THAT THAT great in his prime. Sure he has aged nicely, and continues to fight at an elite level, but at his absolute best, there were still many, many fighters better than him.

So what I'm saying is, in terms of longevity and resume sure he'd be up there, but in terms of ability and head to head comparisons, he'll never be near the very top becuase his very best is not as good as quite a few other fighters.


The above is just your opinion tho and not definite fact. Like Holmes, at their absolute peak we didn't see them vs other greats, unlike say SRL, Duran, Benitez, Hagler and Hearn's. You might not rate Hopkins THAT THAT THAT great a fighter or head to head, but plenty of others will. Some rate a Holmes easily top 3 head to head ever, others might not even have him 10. Personally i think both ARE supremely good/great head to head. One mans trash can be anothers treasure of course.

I have the underlying feeling you also think Chavez is getting a bit underdone around here just recently, and if so i'd have to say i totally agree.

[sweet_scientist]

The above is just your opinion tho and not definite fact. Like Holmes, at their absolute peak we didn't see them vs other greats, unlike say SRL, Duran, Benitez, Hagler and Hearn's. You might not rate Hopkins THAT THAT THAT great a fighter or head to head, but plenty of others will. Some rate a Holmes easily top 3 head to head ever, others might not even have him 10. Personally i think both ARE supremely good/great head to head. One mans trash can be anothers treasure of course.

I have the underlying feeling you also think Chavez is getting a bit underdone around here just recently, and if so i'd have to say i totally agree.
Of course, that's just my opinion. But if you leave it open for Bernard Hopkins to compete with the very best, is it any more rediculous to say someone like Shane Mosley could compete with the best, and that if he beats a Miguel Cotto or Ricky Hatton he could make top 10?

If you say no becuase Shane lost to Forrest, Wright or say DLH, well you could make the argument that Hopkins lost to Taylor and Wright (and of course to Roy).

[mcvey]

In the next two years? What do you think?

Say he beats Calzaghe/Kessler, pretty convincingly, then climbs up to heavyweight and grabs a strap, then retires.

He'd have 20 defences at Middle, champ at 168, ring champ at 175 plus strap holder at heavy.

Could he scale top 10 heights? How about top 20?
I have ajob placing him in thre top ten Middleweights!

[McGrain]

What would you do with him if he beat Kessler/Calzaghe and then Chagaev?

I have ajob placing him in thre top ten Middleweights!

[JohnThomas1]

Of course, that's just my opinion. But if you leave it open for Bernard Hopkins to compete with the very best, is it any more rediculous to say someone like Shane Mosley could compete with the best, and that if he beats a Miguel Cotto or Ricky Hatton he could make top 10?

If you say no becuase Shane lost to Forrest, Wright or say DLH, well you could make the argument that Hopkins lost to Taylor and Wright (and of course to Roy).

Shane lost pretty close to his peak, Hopkins definitely didn't. The comparison is stretched to me. Hopkins defences, his unifications and numerous years unbeaten and solid peak hammer anything Shane has done. I'm not debating the thread topic, the top 10 spot. It's not out of the question Bhop might still be able to make 10-20 possibly tho, who knows.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Archie Moore probably doesn't get into the Top 10 spot, so Hopkins doesn't have much hope. If he beats Wlad I'll re-consider it. :good

[McGrain]

Archie Moore probably doesn't get into the Top 10 spot, so Hopkins doesn't have much hope. If he beats Wlad I'll re-consider it. :good

You're going to have to show me your list now...

[JohnThomas1]

Archie Moore probably doesn't get into the Top 10 spot, so Hopkins doesn't have much hope. If he beats Wlad I'll re-consider it. :good

You're generousity is only exceeded by your Myth Busting prowess.

[JohnThomas1]

well you could make the argument that Hopkins lost to Taylor and Wright (and of course to Roy).

Not many would claim Hopkins lost to Wright. Didn't you score DLH over Mayweather the other day? To be honest i haven't watched the full fight but can't recall seeing many if any touting Oscar. I see Oscar congratulate Hop after the fight, maybe he's chasing a piece of 175 pie

:lol:

[My dinner with Conteh]

You're going to have to show me your list now...



I've never really done one. :oops:

[McGrain]

I've never really done one. :oops:

Then don't say bad things about Archie.

I sympathise though...I got a post WW2 one that i'm confused about and has gone all soft, and a pre WW2 one that only has 7 slots filled. When I try to join them both together into an awe inspiring top 17 :patsch i get angry and strat throwing things.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Then don't say bad things about Archie.

I sympathise though...I got a post WW2 one that i'm confused about and has gone all soft, and a pre WW2 one that only has 7 slots filled. When I try to join them both together into an awe inspiring top 17 :patsch i get angry and strat throwing things.



No, but if I did a rough one, I reckon Charles would be around 9/10. Ahead of Moore, who probably gets in at around 16. :yikes


* Logs off*



* Runs away*

[McGrain]

No, but if I did a rough one, I reckon Charles would be around 9/10. Ahead of Moore, who probably gets in at around 16. :yikes


* Logs off*



* Runs away*


When you do these lists you always end up leaving of great, great fighters. Only ten slots in a top ten. Then nightmare is you do end up doing a 20...then a 25...then you realise you've forgotten someone and start throwing things.

If you're not TBooze or Sweet Scientist it's probably best left.

[Nemesis]

No, but if I did a rough one, I reckon Charles would be around 9/10. Ahead of Moore, who probably gets in at around 16. :yikes


* Logs off*



* Runs away*

I've never done one myself, i dont particularly like lists.

I dont remember if you have ever stated your numero uno, so go one give us your top three :good

[sweet_scientist]

Shane lost pretty close to his peak, Hopkins definitely didn't. The comparison is stretched to me. Hopkins defences, his unifications and numerous years unbeaten and solid peak hammer anything Shane has done. I'm not debating the thread topic, the top 10 spot. It's not out of the question Bhop might still be able to make 10-20 possibly tho, who knows.

Hopkins is the better fighter but not by all that much imo.

Personally I'd say the Jones loss was as close to Hopkins' peak as the Forrest loss was to Shane's peak. (Of course Jones was a much better fighter than Forrest).

As to numerous years unbeaten, Mosley went unbeaten from 1993 to 2002. Hopkins went unbeaten from 1993-2005.

Hopkins has a longer series of defences at 160 than Shane had at 135, but if we're talking meaningful title defenses, Hopkins hasn't had that many more. I mean, would it be more impressive if Shane hung around lightweight and gave a couple of rematches each to Demetrio Ceballos and Golden Johnson and eventually unified with a Cesar Bazan or a Paul Spadafora?

[sweet_scientist]

Not many would claim Hopkins lost to Wright. Didn't you score DLH over Mayweather the other day? To be honest i haven't watched the full fight but can't recall seeing many if any touting Oscar. I see Oscar congratulate Hop after the fight, maybe he's chasing a piece of 175 pie

:lol:

Yeah I had Oscar by a point. I know Ron Borges had Oscar winning, and since he plagiarises, he probably copied someone else's scorecard who had it for Oscar as well. That makes two at least :D

[Duodenum]

RJJ essentially decisioned Hopkins with one good hand. Bernard desperately needed to avenge that defeat.

Just as Barry Bonds would be a legitimate MLB HOFer without steroids, so too would B-Hop have been an ATG in the 15 round era. But I don't think he ever had a chance to reach top ten P4P status without avenging that loss to RJJ in impressive fashion. In earlier times, they would have had a series of matches to determine who was consistently better. He would also do very well to nail down a win over Jermain Taylor.

[PowerPuncher]

Shane lost pretty close to his peak, Hopkins definitely didn't. The comparison is stretched to me. Hopkins defences, his unifications and numerous years unbeaten and solid peak hammer anything Shane has done. I'm not debating the thread topic, the top 10 spot. It's not out of the question Bhop might still be able to make 10-20 possibly tho, who knows.

Hopkins lost against RJJ in his physical prime. He ducked RJJ in his prime

Mosley dominating at lightweight and jumping to welter to beat Delahoya twice is no small task and depending on the end to his career may put him on par with BHOPs.

[mcvey]

What would you do with him if he beat Kessler/Calzaghe and then Chagaev?
Kessler and Chagaev are unproven,a win over Calzaghe would be impressive but unlikely,I just dont think B Hop is that good ,he shines in a small talent pool ,I dont rate Taylor too high ,he is much too passive ,and Tarver is nothing special .Hopkins best other wins were over men coming up in weight,he has dominated his division but ,they havent been much ,imo,Hopkins looks better than he is because there are so few decent figters his weight around.